by Guest » July 26, 2025, 7:52 am
Wayne wrote: July 25, 2025, 2:11 pm
Thank you,
I found the deck a very odd configuration. I have seen lots of boats over the years but not one with that type of deck layout. Single point loading?
That single point loading concept is interesting. I would assume that there is a trade off on the size of vessel and its intended trading route distances that influence the effectiveness of such a system as the added weight of such an installation would decrease the amount of its carrying capacity by reducing the available draft. While this might seem insignificant in the comparison of the weight of the single point loading system in comparison to the tonnage of the vessel such a reduction would, over time, cause the vessel to carry significantly less cargo than a vessel without such an arrangement. A more extreme example of this is the practice of continuing to build gearless bulk carriers primarily engaged in the grain and ore trades through the St. Lawrence Seaway. The capacity lost with the hold configuration and the weight of the unloading gear becomes more pronounced over longer voyage distances when the time saved by using an onboard unloading system is offset by reduced carrying capacity. As US shipping companies are primarily concentrated on trading points west of the Welland Canal, the shorter distances involved plays a significant role in the current dominance of the self-unloader in the US fleet. I have little doubt that if the US fleet was more engaged in the Seaway and grain trades, there would be a corresponding mix of straight deck bulk carriers and self-unloaders in the fleet.
Among other variables, I would tend to believe that the inclusion of a single point loading system would take into consideration the amount of time and labor costs saved in not having to shift a vessel when loading at facilities that do not have movable loading systems. Does anyone know how a single point unloading system affects the design of the cargo holds?
[quote=Wayne post_id=273506 time=1753470668]
Thank you,
I found the deck a very odd configuration. I have seen lots of boats over the years but not one with that type of deck layout. Single point loading?
[/quote]
That single point loading concept is interesting. I would assume that there is a trade off on the size of vessel and its intended trading route distances that influence the effectiveness of such a system as the added weight of such an installation would decrease the amount of its carrying capacity by reducing the available draft. While this might seem insignificant in the comparison of the weight of the single point loading system in comparison to the tonnage of the vessel such a reduction would, over time, cause the vessel to carry significantly less cargo than a vessel without such an arrangement. A more extreme example of this is the practice of continuing to build gearless bulk carriers primarily engaged in the grain and ore trades through the St. Lawrence Seaway. The capacity lost with the hold configuration and the weight of the unloading gear becomes more pronounced over longer voyage distances when the time saved by using an onboard unloading system is offset by reduced carrying capacity. As US shipping companies are primarily concentrated on trading points west of the Welland Canal, the shorter distances involved plays a significant role in the current dominance of the self-unloader in the US fleet. I have little doubt that if the US fleet was more engaged in the Seaway and grain trades, there would be a corresponding mix of straight deck bulk carriers and self-unloaders in the fleet.
Among other variables, I would tend to believe that the inclusion of a single point loading system would take into consideration the amount of time and labor costs saved in not having to shift a vessel when loading at facilities that do not have movable loading systems. Does anyone know how a single point unloading system affects the design of the cargo holds?